As we reported, in his testimony before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday, former Hunter Biden business associate Tony Bobulinski not only called out Hunter and Jim Biden for perjury during their interviews with the House, but he also lit up Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), saying that they had both lied in the past.
But Bobulinski wasn't the only person calling out Jamie Raskin and the Democrats for not telling the truth on Wednesday. He also got fact-checked big time by George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley. Turley busted Raskin for what he said about Turley's testimony in regard to the impeachment inquiry, saying he wasn't telling the truth.
...Rep. Raskin (D., Md.) just stated that that I testified with other witnesses that "nothing woudl approach" an impeachable offense in this inquiry. That again is not true. I said that opposite. I stated that there was ample evidence for the inquiry and, if proven, the…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 20, 2024
Raskin tried to use Turley's prior testimony in the impeachment inquiry, claiming Turley said "nothing would approach" an impeachable offense in this inquiry. "That again is not true," Turley said. "I said the opposite. I stated there was evidence for the inquiry and, if proven, the allegations would amount to impeachable offenses."
Turley also took on Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA), believing Lynch was making a similar comment with what he had said in his testimony.
...I stated that there was "ample" evidence for an impeachment inquiry based on the existing evidence and, if proven, some of these allegations would be a credible basis for impeachment. https://t.co/KK1j4rjA3L...
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 20, 2024
Turley said that his point had been that you don't start the inquiry with the presumption of impeachable conduct; you start with whether an inquiry is warranted, and he testified that it was.
"To declare impeachable acts at the very start of an inquiry would have prejudged the evidence. I repeatedly laid out before and after that committee potential impeachable offenses," Turley said.
The point he was making was that you shouldn't prejudge the evidence, but yes, there were potential impeachable offenses.
...Moreover, the Committee was aware that was my position before their invited me to testify. To declare impeachable acts at the very start of an inquiry would have prejudged the evidence. I repeatedly laid out before and after that committee potential impeachable offenses.…
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 20, 2024
How desperate are the Democrats when they even have to miscast what Turley said to suggest there isn't any evidence? Bobulinski and Jason Galanis laid out how false this argument was on Wednesday. The Democrats should be looking into this to protect the country, but they only seem to be concerned about defending Biden.
Between Bobulinski dancing all over them and Turley dunking on their dishonesty over what they said about the evidence, I think it's fair to say their defense of Biden did not go well.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member